1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 1581 of 2024 1 - I.C.I.C.I. Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Through Branch Manager Branch Office Ground Floor, Vanijya Bhavan, Devendra Nagar Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Present Address 5th Floor, Skypark, Opp. Banthia Nursing Home Canal Road, Civil Lines, Raipur 492001 Chhattisgarh, (Insurance Company Of Scorpio Vehicle Bearing No. C.G. - 26 - E - 4925) Policy No. 3001/ Mm/15755386/00/000 (Non-Applicant No. 3) ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Anita Nag W/o Late Tulsi Nag Aged About 31 Years (Wife Of Deceased) R/o Gram Guma Tarai Tikra, Thana- Puspal Dist. Sukma , C.G. (Claimant) 2 - Ku. Arushila Nag D/o Late Tulsi Nag Aged About 6 Years Minor, (Daughter Of Deceased), Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Anita Nag, R/o Gram Guma Tarai Tikra, Thana- Puspal Dist. Sukma , C.G. (Claimant) 3 - Ku. Tileshwari Nag D/o Late Tulsi Nag Aged About 2 Years Minor, (Daughter Of Deceased), Through Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Anita Nag, R/o Gram Guma Tarai Tikra, Thana- Puspal Dist. Sukma , C.G. (Claimant) 4 - Smt. Mari Nag W/o Sonu Nag Aged About 55 Years (Mother Of Deceased), R/o Gram Guma Tarai Tikra, Thana- Puspal Dist. Sukma , C.G. (Claimant) 5 - Sonu Nag S/o Aamta Nag Aged About 56 Years (Father Of Deceased),...R/o Gram Guma Tarai Tikra, Thana- Puspal Dist. Sukma , C.G. (Claimant) 6 - Nilambar Singh Thakur S/o Neelkanth Singh Thakur R/o Gram Netnar, Thakurpara, Thana - Puspal, Tehsil Kota, District Sukma (C.G.), (Driver Of Offending Scorpio No. C.G. - 26 - E - 4925) 7 - Virendra Nag S/o Budhuram Nag House No. 23, Gram Netnar, Post - Talnar, Thana - Puspal, Tehsil Konta, District Sumka (C.G.), (Owner Of Offending Scorpio No. C.G. - 26 - E - 4925) ---- Respondents For Appellant/Insurance Company : Mr. Suraj Patel, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Shekhar Rao Saheb, Adv. For respondents No.6 & 7 : Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 13.10.2025 -2- 1. The appellant/Insurance company has filed this appeal challenging the liability part against an award passed by learned Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dantewada, South Bastar (C.G.) in Claim Case No.100/2022, whereby learned Claims Tribunal passed an award to the tune of Rs.25,34,928/- with interest @ 9% per annum on account of death of one Tulsi Nag. 2. The facts of the present case are that on 03.06.2022 at about 7:00 p.m., the deceased Tulsi Nag and six other persons were returning to their village in Scorpio bearing registration NoC.G.26/E/4925 which was being driven by Nilambar Singh Thakur/respondent No.6 rashly and negligently, resultantly, he dashed a tree and the deceased Tulsi Nag and Lacchuram Nag sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot whereas six persons sustained serious injuries. 3. The claimants are widow, minor children and parents of the deceased. They pleaded that age of the deceased Tulsi Nag was 25 years and he was a mason and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. They claimed sum of Rs.57,50,000/-. The Insurance Company filed reply and denied the contents of claim application. It was pleaded that the claim application has been filed on baseless grounds and offending vehicle was being driven in breach of insurance policy. It was also pleaded that the vehicle was four-wheeler bundle package policy for a period of one year from 13.11.2020 to 12.11.2021 and after period of one year, it was act only policy from 13.11.2021 to 12.11.2023. It was also pleaded that the occupants of said Scorpio would not come within the definition of third party and therefore, they are not entitle to get compensation. 4. Learned Claims Tribunal framed issues, parties led evidence and 3 award was passed. 5. Mr. Patel, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/insurance company would argue that as the deceased was an occupant of the said Scorpio vehicle, therefore, he would not come within the category of third party. He would contend that the offending vehicle was covered with a private car package policy but vehicle was being used as commercial vehicle and 8 occupants were travelling in breach of sitting capacity. He would submit that the liability of insurance company is of Rs.1,00,000/- only. He would further submit that the learned Tribunal committed an error of law while fastening liability with the Insurance Company. He would pray to set aside the award. 6. On the other hand, Ms. Soni, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.6 & 7 would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Patel. She would submit that the learned Tribunal has passed just and proper compensation and the Insurance Company failed to adduce evidence before the learned Tribunal in this regard. She would contend that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 8. A perusal of the award would show that the learned Tribunal has framed specific issue No.2 with regard to breach of policy. 9. Arshad Hussain, (NAW-1) examined by the Insurance Company has stated that a package car policy was issued for a period of one year from 13.11.2020 to 12.11.2021 and thereafter, the vehicle was insured under act only policy for further two years. He further stated that as the date of accident was 03.06.2022 and thus, the insurance company would not be liable to make payment of compensation -4- after expiry of package policy. This witness admitted the fact that there is no investigation report to establish the fact that the offending vehicle was being used as commercial vehicle. 10.A perusal of the Insurance policy would show that the premium of Rs.24,305/- was paid to cover the liability of third party. It is also admitted fact that the vehicle was insured with the bundle private car policy and the risk of the third party was also covered. The insurance company could not prove the fact that no premium was paid to cover the risk of occupants rather the witness examined by the insurance company has admitted this fact. 11.Considering the above-discussed facts, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the award passed by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha